Can a woman....

[Pastorj]

"The word "Usurp" is there as an expression that it is nOT the God ordained order for a woman to be in authority over a man and any time that she is in authority over a man she is taking a position she should nOT rightfully take."

I fail to see the difference. If your saying what I think you may be trying to say the wording of scripture would be more like this: "But I suffer nOT a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority FROM A man" which would mean she should nOT take authority away from a man. Instead it actually reads: "But I suffer nOT a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority OVER THE man" which means a woman should nOT take a position of authority over any adult male.

That is faulty exposition of the passage. Go back to bOTh the english and Greek definitions. The word usurp means to forcefully take a position that is nOT yours. If the pastor asks her to lead the choir, she is nOT forcefully taking a position that she doesn't belong in. She is still under the authority of the pastor. Now if she decides that the pastor's music is wrong and she is going to use whatever she wants, she is then usurping his authority.

[1Timothy115]

We can agree to have a difference of opinion here...I hope. But, I believe there is much to be taught through music in worship of our Lord.

Most songs we sing in my congregation have a scriptural base and usually words from scripture and they teach you about God.

If I'm wrong then, the leader of hymns in heaven will set me straight.

[holster]

-edit-
Most songs we sing in my congregation have a scriptural base and usually words from scripture and they teach you about God.

You don't sing songs written by women do you? (Fanny Crosby for example.) Would that be a woman teaching a man?

(I'm just trying to "stir the pOT"! - Good Thread)

[John81]

You don't sing songs written by women do you? (Fanny Crosby for example.) Would that be a woman teaching a man?

(I'm just trying to "stir the pOT"! - Good Thread)

That's a good question to ask since some say a man shouldn't read a book written by a woman.

[Revelation3:20]

Do you believe this applies to the church only or to all areas of life?

It definitely applies to the church first and foremost but I also think Paul meant it to apply to life in general. I don't see how the the first part of the two part reasoning he gives for it "For Adam was first formed, then Eve." would apply only in a church setting. The second part of his reasoning where he says: "And Adam was nOT deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression." deals with spiritual discernment so an argument could be made that that was meant to cover spiritual issues only.

[Revelation3:20]

That is faulty exposition of the passage. Go back to bOTh the english and Greek definitions. The word usurp means to forcefully take a position that is nOT yours. If the pastor asks her to lead the choir, she is nOT forcefully taking a position that she doesn't belong in. She is still under the authority of the pastor. Now if she decides that the pastor's music is wrong and she is going to use whatever she wants, she is then usurping his authority.

Well brOTher, we are probably at an impasse, but I would like to say don't think your interpretation makes any sense. If "Usurp" was meant to only mean a woman should nOT forcefully take a position that was nOT hers why mention gender at all? No man in the church should be "suffered" to forcefully take a position that isn't his either.

Also if your interpretation is correct why would Paul bring up Adam and Eve at all? What would that have to do with anything if God's objection was only to the forceful seizing of power? I maintain that Paul brought up Adam and Eve to show that God meant the man to lead and be in a authority over the woman(or his wife more specifically) nOT the OTher way around.

"But I suffer nOT a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence. For Adam was first formed, then Eve. And Adam was nOT deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression."

[JerryNumbers]

hummm.. well, guess you disagree with me too as I also stated that the choir director does nOT have to be a leadership position.

The good pastor should "lead" the direction of the choir without having to be the choir director. The pastor should have such a relationship with the choir director that they work together well and the director knows what the pastor wants. Even if the director gets "out of hand" once or twice the pastor can still correct the situation, thus, he (the pastor) is still leading... Even with a Male director the pastor will still have to do this guiding and leading....

Well brOTher, we are probably at an impasse, but I would like to say don't think your interpretation makes any sense. If "Usurp" was meant to only mean a woman should nOT forcefully take a position that was nOT hers why mention gender at all? No man in the church should be "suffered" to forcefully take a position that isn't his either.

Also if your interpretation is correct why would Paul bring up Adam and Eve at all? What would that have to do with anything if God's objection was only to the forceful seizing of power? I maintain that Paul brought up Adam and Eve to show that God meant the man to lead and be in a authority over the woman(or his wife more specifically) nOT the OTher way around.

"But I suffer nOT a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence. For Adam was first formed, then Eve. And Adam was nOT deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression."

Your last 2 post makes very good sense. Its quite amazing at the number of Christians that disagree with this. Paul lays it out quite plain when he speaks of Adam and Eve.

[Pastorj]

When looking at Scripture you must ask yourself a couple questions.
1. Who wrOTe it and who was he writing to?
A. Paul penned this book to TimOThy who was a Pastor.

2. Why was Paul writing this letter?
A. To give young TimOThy instruction on the church

As we look at the end of chapter two, we have to first look at what transpired prior.
In chapter 1, Paul is explaining that TimOThy needs to be careful who is being used to teach the Word of God.

1Ti 1:6 From which some having swerved have turned aside unto vain jangling;
1Ti 1:7 Desiring to be teachers of the law; understanding neither what they say, nor whereof they affirm.

Paul takes the rest of chapter 1 to explain the purpose of the law that was being used improperly and concludes by challenging TimOThy to hold to the faith and fight a good warfare.

1Ti 1:18 This charge I commit unto thee, son TimOThy, according to the prophecies which went before on thee, that thou by them mightest war a good warfare;

He begins chapter two with a conclusion to this thought and an exhortation to pray for all men, but especially to those in authority. Paul is encouraging TimOThy in this path because the Gospel can be used to reach anyone. Paul at this point transitions to the church in verse 7 when he states that this is the whole reason he is a preacher.

1Ti 2:7 Whereunto I am ordained a preacher, and an apostle, (I speak the truth in Christ, and lie nOT a teacher of the Gentiles in faith and verity.

In verse 8 Paul makes it clear that Men ought to be the ones leading in prayer.

Now with this in mind Paul turns to women in verse 9 through 15. Remember that the context of this book is dealing with the church and the false teachers that had crept into it.

Vs. 9 - Deals with how women are to dress. Paul was dealing a problem in the church. Women were dressing in such a way that was immodest and was drawing attention to themselves.

Vs. 10 - Paul exhorts women to dress and act in a way that becometh Godliness.

What ways can a woman act that would becometh Godliness
vs. 11 - Learn in Silence and in subjection. Who should women be in subjection to? Their husband. Elsewhere Paul teaches that if they have any questions, they are to ask their husbands at home.

vs. 12 - She is nOT to teach or usurp authority over the man.

Now if you have followed this exposition of this passage, you have nOTiced that the context of the passage is the church. I will come back to vs 12 in a moment.

vs. 13-15 - Why should the woman nOT teach or usurp authority over a man? Because Adam was formed first and Eve was the one being deceived.

So the verses in dispute is verse 12.
1Ti 2:12 But I suffer nOT a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence.

Teach - What teaching are we talking about? In context we are talking about doctrine.
Usurp - To seize and hold in possession by force or without right -

What shouldn't a woman usurp? Authority over the man.
Authority - The power derived from opinion, respect or esteem; influence of character or office; credit; as the authority of age or example, which is submitted to or respected, in some measure, as a law, or rule of action. That which is claimed in justification or support of opinions and measures.

Who should she nOT usurp authority over?
A. The man

Who is "the man". The greek word used here is pointing to a singular individual. The man is nOT just any man, but husband to whom she is to be in subjection to. That is why the end of the chapter deals with the role of the man and woman.

So can a woman lead a choir and nOT "usurp" the authority of her husband?
Absolutely. A husband can allow her to do it and she is doing it under his authority and he is under the pastor.

[Revelation3:20]

As I say we have reached an impasse. We read the same verse and reach very different conclusions. I view usurping authority as being placed in direct contrast with "being in silence" since the scriptures puts it that way by saying "nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence.". May the Lord give those following this thread wisdom to understand his will in this matter.

[His by Grace]

[This statement expresses what I believe-after a great deal of reseach and prayer. Our hymnals teach God's Word and touch you with the Truth while praises the Lord. We aren't just to sing but to Praise Him. For me this isn't a position for a women. quOTe='1Tim115' pid='219387' dateline='1251917583']
We can agree to have a difference of opinion here...I hope. But, I believe there is much to be taught through music in worship of our Lord.

Most songs we sing in my congregation have a scriptural base and usually words from scripture and they teach you about God.

If I'm wrong then, the leader of hymns in heaven will set me straight.

[Pastorj]

Rev,

I agree we are an impasse. The passage is clear and the words used have clear meanings. If we choose nOT to follow the literal and contextual interpretation, we come up with faulty application.

[holster]

Rev,

I agree we are an impasse.

Yea! You guys agree on something!

[JerryNumbers]

Yea! You guys agree on something!

YES, finally long at last, :icon_biggrin: agreeing to agree to disagree.

[His by Grace]

Aren't we not to offend in all points? Wouldn't it be wrong for a women to be song leading if this offended some of the men? Made them stumble? She would be teaching men then--wouldn't she? If not then why not? Isn't that wrong for women to be teaching men? I've understood women should only teach women? Am I missing something?

[trc123]

Aren't we not to offend in all points? Wouldn't it be wrong for a women to be song leading if this offended some of the men? Made them stumble?

Would this cause some to "sin?" Or just be in disagreement?

How far do you take this we are "not to offend in all points?" Anything and everything another Christian (or even non-Christian) conjures up as offending them?